Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22065261›Full record

Trial reportThe Psychiatric quarterly2012

Who benefits from peer support in psychiatric institutions?

Franziska Rabenschlag, Holger Hoffmann, Antoinette Conca, Claudia Schusterschitz

Open access · bronzeAbstract readClinical Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in The Psychiatric quarterly, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 3 institutions in 4 countries.

Franziska RabenschlagMedical Informatics and Technology in Hall, UMIT-University for Health Sciences, Tyrol, Austria. rabenschlag.franziska@umit.at
Holger Hoffmann
Antoinette Conca
Claudia Schusterschitz
UMIT - Private Universität für Gesundheitswissenschaften, Medizinische Informatik und Technik · ATUniversity Hospital of Bern · CHUniversity of Turku · FI

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study examines the influence of recovery-oriented peer events on participants' recovery attitudes and explores who benefits most from such events. Changes in participants' recovery attitudes were evaluated (pre, post, follow-up), and compared with changes of control groups. Distributions of recovery-related values in subgroups were analyzed descriptively. The results of non-parametric tests (Friedman) showed participants with significantly higher values in the dimension Recovery is possible directly after the interventions (P = 0.006), but not 6 months later, and not in comparison with members of control groups. On a descriptive level, women, participants with schizophrenia and with two or more episodes of the disorder showed higher recovery-related values compared to men, participants with an affective disorder and only one episode. Within their feedback, organizations and peers express a positive view of peer support, but evidence for a positive impact of the evaluated peer events on recovery attitude is limited.

Indexed as

Attitude to HealthPeer GroupSelf-Help GroupsSocial SupportAdultFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHospitals, PsychiatricHumansMaleMental DisordersStatistics, NonparametricSurveys and QuestionnairesSwitzerlandTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID22065261
OpenAlexW2027810993

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.